Needle Exchange Programs: Effective, but at What Cost?

Albany, New York has recently begun a needle exchange program for drug addicts with the hope that the spread of illnesses, such as AIDS or HIV, would lessen. This would cost taxpayers over $150,000 annually; however, it is argued, that without so many people getting sick, it could save money in the end.

At first, I was against this; supplying addicts with the equipment to do illegal drugs sounded nuts. But, being the good little reporter that I try to be, I researched this deeper and was surprised by what I found.

Looking at reports from regions that have already tried similar programs, it became clear that the benefits of such programs were surprising. Studies from the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and the Netherlands, along with raw data from Wales and Uzbekistan clearly show that not only will addicts use such programs, but it helps to reduce HIV a sizable amount. Furthermore, with the spread of education, it is possible for people to be convinced to stop doing drugs.

However, there is a major caveat in the data that sticks out. In the data from the US, UK, Canada, Wales, and the Netherlands, the amount of money saved by having these programs is not clearly stated. The only hard data was from (who would have guessed) Uzbek statistics. They place the minimum cost per infection averted at $1,288 and as high as $9,537. That's per person who did not get a disease because of the program.

So, which saves the taxpayers more money? The data does not say, but nearly $10,000 per illness-stopped could outweigh the many of the benefits.

In the end, it is very surprising to see how effective these programs were in preventing HIV and spreading education. However, the cost could be incredibly high. But after looking at this data, I am no longer very against this program... I need to study it further to come to a final conclusion.

Bookmark our site!

Consider advertising on our site!

Why Marijuana Should be Legalized

For the last forty years, there's been an abundance of debate on the issue of legalizing marijuana. While I've never been a user, I do believe that the case can be made that the government can legalize and closely restrict this substance. While it is illegal, it should not be used unless under doctor's strict permission.

But first, some faulty arguments I've heard why it should be legalized:

1. It's natural. Sure it is. But so's hemlock, coca, and tobacco. Just cause it grows from the ground doesn't mean that we need to ingest it.

2. It's a victimless crime. Yes, often the act of ingesting drugs is a "victimless" crime. But to think of the growing and transport business that is behind it-- competition, gang wars, and drug-running. Not all of this is marijuana, but enough people die because of it, even if none do directly.

3. Cigarettes are worse. Pound for pound, smoking marijuana is worse for the human body. Inhaling deep into the lungs causes more damage to the air sacs and could lead to more respiratory problems.

So in the light of this, why should it be legalized? Because the benefits far outweigh the risks.

1. By reducing the funding needed for anti-drug enforcement, hundreds of millions of dollars can be saved each year. In addition, not keeping people in jail for small possessions will save millions in incarceration costs.

2. By making only a certain, genetically-altered strain legal, the government can ban all "non-allowed" marijuana, making it easier to lock up those selling the non-legal sub-species.

3. By allowing corporations to sell the substance under regulation, government (state and federal) can tax it. Under these circumstance, billions of dollars can be added to the treasury rolls each year.

So there you have it.

Consider advertising on our site!
Also, if you need to search anything on Google, please use the bar below:

Will Obama Send Troops to Mexican Border?

It's beginning to creep into the news. Violence is in the rise in Mexico and drug cartels are battling the central government. Drugs are still pouring into the country, and cross-border killings are not ceasing.

And so, what will our government do about it? We've increased our border patrol along the Rio Grande and have sent some National Guard troops, as well. However, the plans for the southern border fence have been scrapped and we're still at a loss about what to do.

And now our own reports call Mexico close to a "failed state." Mexico's government has sent troops into violent areas, only to see the attacks continue. Beheaded bodies are found frequently and local officials are corrupt.

What President Obama can do:

* Deploy up to 50,000 additional border patrol and National Guard troops along the border in order to stem the flow of illegal drugs and aliens.

* Ask Congress to complete the southern border fence, reaching from San Diego to the Gulf of Mexico.

* Sell the Mexican military our excess or outdated recon planes, armored personnel carriers, and perhaps some modern UAVs to patrol their troubled areas.

* Deploy UAVs along the border, linked to local military and border patrol stations.

* Ask Colombia to send some anti-terrorism experts to Mexico in order to stop the cartels and stem the drug trade.

* Announce the establishment of military tribunals for non-citizen drug cartel leaders suspected of murder in the United States.

* Announce restrictions on Mexican goods if additional drugs are brought into the country.

Whether the new President will do this is another thing. However, any actions he takes should consider the integrity of our borders and attempt to work with the Mexican government against these agitators.

Also, if you need to search anything on Google, please use the bar below: